Saturday, May 24, 2014

Celebrated author and liberal darling Thomas Piketty may have skewed data about Western inequality in his latest bestseller.

According to an investigation conducted by the Financial Times economics editor Chris Giles, Piketty’s newest book about the growing inequality in Western world, “Capital in the 21st Century,” is chock-full of serious factual errors.

Giles wrote in an FT article on Friday that the arguments in Piketty’s 571-page critique of capitalism were undermined by “mistakes and unexplained entries in his spreadsheets.”

He explained that due to the misinformation presented in the book, there is little weight behind Piketty’s argument on economic inequality.

Prof Piketty, 43, provides detailed sourcing for his estimates of wealth inequality in Europe and the US over the past 200 years. In his spreadsheets, however, there are transcription errors from the original sources and incorrect formulas. It also appears that some of the data are cherry-picked or constructed without an original source.

For example, once the FT cleaned up and simplified the data, the European numbers do not show any tendency towards rising wealth inequality after 1970.

The answer is simple. His lifetime dream of a free public (single payer) healthcare system for all just disintegrated in front of him. Forget the wildly ambitious and pervasive “Affordable Care Act,” the government couldn’t even handle the health of our wounded servicemen, acknowledged for years to be by far the group most deserving of medical attention in our country. With veterans dying while waiting lists are falsified, it’s hard to see government healthcare as anything but incompetent, disgraceful and quite possibly criminal.

Government has failed utterly.

...We are in an interesting moment with so much of the liberal-left ethic disintegrating around them. The next couple of years will be historical — one way or the other.

Each of these elements deserves some unpacking. The incompetence comes in the aftermath of HealthCare.gov — the Technicolor failure of technocratic liberalism. Again, the White House is shocked, saddened and angered by the management fiasco of a manager under its direct control. In both cases, a presidential priority was badly mishandled over a period of years, and the president seems to have learned about it on cable news. Obama has defended himself by assuming the role of an outraged bystander — which, when it comes to leadership, is more of a self-indictment than a defense.

“When you think of how this man was elected,” he began, “‘Yes We Can’ — apart from the narcissism of it — was, ‘Yes, the government can do great things: Revolutionize healthcare, create a green energy economy, do all of this efficiently.’”

“He can’t even run a decades-old, normal, absolutely mundane healthcare system that are run everywhere in the world between here and Togo,” Krauthammer charged. “So the idea that this is a government that’s going to do great new things — universal preschool and all of these wonderful promises — is totally dissolved.”

On Wednesday, the Service Employees International Union, as part of its four-year old plan to unionize the nation’s fast-food workers, launched a frontal assault on McDonald’s corporate headquarters in Oakbrook, Illinois.
During the event, over 100 protesters, as well SEIU boss and fast-food unionization architect Mary Kay Henry, were arrested.

After her arrest, the SEIU’s self-anointed Burger Queen actually thanked the police on her Twitter feed.

The union’s event planners had rented 32 buses, ensured they had prominent civil rights leaders in tow for photo-ops as they stormed the company’s entrance and, while they had some of McDonald’s 440,000 U.S. employees, the vast majority of protesters (about 84%, according to Bloomberg’s numbers) appear to be nothing more than a rent-a-mob (or astroturf, as the case may be)...

The big scary headline claim in almost all of these alarmist articles which screamed that the rate of Antarctica ice loss has “doubled” compared to prior estimates is wrong. The alarmist reporters have managed to confuse two distinct issues addressed in this latest study which dealt with both continental Antarctic ice loss as well as the contribution of this Antarctica ice loss to sea level rise.

As Paul now looks toward a potential bid for president in 2016, he is still struggling to shake the notion, held by many powerful Republicans and average Americans, that he is outside the political mainstream. The word “transformative” is thrown around regularly by Paul's allies as they envision what shape his presidential bid could take: Paul doesn't have to change, the subtext reads; it is the Republican Party that must evolve and expand to accommodate his vision.

Indeed, Paul’s policies seem to cater to a yet-emerging idea of the American political center, which was outlined in great detail in an Esquire-NBC News survey last year. The poll was remarkable because, rather than relying on party identification to classify voters, it assigned them to one of eight groups of like-minded Americans across the political spectrum based on policy preferences, with four of the eight groups comprising the center.

The poll showed that most Americans identify most closely with Democrats on some important policy preferences, such as social issues, but simultaneously gravitate toward some Republican economic policies. They want the U.S. to be a strong international superpower, but largely disengaged. And yes, they support term limits.

As a scandal involving long delays at Veterans Affairs hospitals mounts, it's worth recalling that liberals have long touted the socialized medical system as evidence that government-run health care can work.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman has penned several valentines to the Veterans Health Administration over the years. In a 2006 column, Krugman argued that the system was, “one of the best-kept secrets in the American policy debate.”

He explained, “pundits and policy makers don't talk about the veterans' system because they can't handle the cognitive dissonance. ... For the lesson of the V.H.A.'s success story -- that a government agency can deliver better care at lower cost than the private sector -- runs completely counter to the pro-privatization, anti-government conventional wisdom that dominates today's Washington.”

...A Los Angeles Times investigation found that the problems with the system were widespread. Though the VA has touted improved wait times, the article quoted Dr. Jose Mathews, chief of psychiatry at the VA St. Louis Health Care System, as saying, “The performance data the VA puts out is garbage -- it's designed to make the VA look good on paper.”

Last September, I spent time in England researching the socialized British medical system, the National Health Service, for the Examiner's magazine edition, and encountered similar stories - of patient neglect and an unaccountable bureaucracy focused on gaming the system so they could claim to be meeting targets.

“I just don’t understand that,” Rubio said. “It’s a very simple bill. All it says is that the secretary or any future secretary appointed by this president, a Democratic president, can fire executives in the VA who aren’t doing their jobs. Right now he can’t do that. And they blocked it. So, unfortunately, members of Congress will head home for Memorial Day and veterans will keep waiting for accountability and that’s outrageous.”

On May 8, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals heard argument in PLF's Obamacare challenge, Sissel v. HHS. Listen to what happened at the argument and what's next for the challenge.

The Origination Clause, Article I, Section 7, requires that legislation to raise revenue must start in the House, in order to keep the taxing power close to the people. But Obamacare began in the Senate when Majority Leader Harry Reid took an unrelated House bill (a measure to help veterans buy homes, which raised no revenue), gutted it, and inserted the language of Obamacare.

"The only thing we know for absolute certain about the Origination Clause is that the Senate cannot originate revenue-raising measures," Sandefur said. "Here we have a complete substitution of a six-page bill that was not a bill for raising revenue with a 2,000-page bill that was a bill for raising revenue."

At its May 6 meeting, the Humboldt County Republican Central Committee unanimously endorsed Ron Nehring for Lieutenant Governor in the June 3 primary election.

In his campaign Nehring has been endorsed by 24 Republican county central committees, the California Republican Assembly, the California Young Republican Federation, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Republican Assembly Leader Connie Conway and several other legislators.

About his vision for the Lieutenant Governor’s office, Nehring says, “It is what the holder makes of it. Gavin Newsom uses it as a taxpayer-funded gubernatorial exploratory committee for 2018. I believe it should be a platform to develop and advocate for the bold reforms California needs to restore the state’s competitiveness: in taxes, pensions and education.”

Nehring was twice elected chairman of the California Republican Party (2007-11), served on the board of trustees of San Diego County’s Grossmont Union High School District, one of the largest in the state, and was appointed by Governor Schwarzengegger to the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection.

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Look out, everyone: The nation's school lunch lady, Michelle Obama, is mad. With her federal nutrition program under fire across the country and now on Capitol Hill, Mrs. Obama put out a "forceful" call to arms this week to "health activists," according to The Washington Post.

She's cracking the whip. Her orders are clear: There must be no escape. The East Wing and its sycophants zealously oppose any effort to alter, delay or waive top-down school meal rules. Big Lunch must be guarded at all costs....

Draconian federal rules dictate calorie counts, whole-grain requirements, the number of items that children must put on their trays, and even the color of the fruits and vegetables they must choose. Asked for a solution, (L.A. Unified School District) Food Service Director David Binkle told the Times bluntly: "We can stop forcing children to take food they don't like and throw in the garbage."

Or you can do what Arlington Heights District 214 in Michelle Obama's home state of Illinois just did: Vote yourselves out of the unsavory one-size-fits-all mandate....

"Boko Haram attacks everyone who is Nigerian. Boko Haram is an equal-opportunity threat for all Nigerian citizens."

That answer irritated Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., who chairs the subcommittee panel on global human rights. "You said you wish they would differentiate or discriminate — they were so discriminating. Yes, they'll hit other Nigerians, they'll hit other westerners, but Christians are their main target," he countered....

"The question that I was asked was whether there was an official State Department position on the motivations of Boko Haram, which I simply don't have with me," Sewall replied. "If the question is, 'Does the leadership of Boko Haram and do the actions of Boko Haram target Christianity?' [the answer is] absolutely, unequivocally. More fundamentally, they target other things too and they are a threat to the government and the region. And so I loved the very clear-eyed characterization that was just offered [by Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas], which is that Boko Haram is motivated by hatred. I don't think anybody would disagree with that."

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 90% of Likely U.S. Voters think voters in countries with democratically elected governments have a responsibility to be informed about major policy issues. Just five percent (5%) disagree, while another five percent (5%) are undecided.

That’s campaigning and that’s what Organizing for America was meant to do. Keep on campaigning, even after the candidate has won the election and was in Washington...

It was, as Philip Bump of the Washington Post reports:

… designed to essentially be the Obama presidential campaign, made eternal. "Obama For America" became the non-profit "Organizing For Action" early last year, with the hope of continuing the campaign's energy, organizing, and fundraising prowess to generate support for the president's policy positions.

Now, the organization has:

… told donors that it will stop requesting large contributions this year, even as it has reportedly shed half of its staff.

According to The Hill, the beleaguered supporters of the President are frustrated by the White House’s continued requests for donations, for which they get nothing in return. On Monday night, Obama orchestrated his 22nd fundraiser of 2014 and his 60th since he won the election in 2012. One Democratic strategist observed, “There’s definitely some donor fatigue in a lukewarm environment… They are tired of giving and giving and they know there’s not much more the president can do.”

The conservative journalist duped progressives Ed Begley Jr. and Mariel Hemmingway to get involved in an anti-fracking film that was funded by Middle Eastern oil interests.
O’Keefe will unveil the movie at the Cannes Film Festival on Wednesday!

If you haven't heard the term VMT yet -- you soon will. VMT stands for vehicle miles travelled. It could be referred to as Vehicle Miles Taxed -- because that's the intent of a new measure the California legislature is considering. A new VMT fee would raise more revenue for state highways and infrastructure by charging drivers a fee for every mile they drive. They call this a fee, but make no mistake, its a tax.

On Tuesday morning, Dr. Ben Carson appeared on ABC’s The View. (Typically, we’d cut the video to get to the feature part of the segment, but it’s so solid from start to finish that we’ll leave you the option of jumping ahead to the 6:50 mark.)

Mad River Biologists founder Ron LeValley pleaded guilty in February to a single count of conspiring to embezzle funds from an Indian tribal organization and faced up to two and half years in federal prison in the case. The U.S. Attorney’s Office and the federal probation department felt a one year prison sentence was appropriate in the case, but U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup ultimately opted for the 10-month sentence, citing cooperation with a federal investigation into the grift — cooperation that led directly to the conviction of LeValley’s co-conspirator, former Yurok Tribe Forestry Director Roland Raymond, who was sentenced to a three-year prison term in January....

...This White House’s “we found out on the news” formulation has become such predictable boilerplate that Allahpundit didn’t even have to spell it out in his earlier headline, and the “anger” charade is its inevitable counterpart. Nobody is madder — “madder than hell” in this case — than the president, you guys. But as MKH noted last week, the president’s ostentatious fury generally recedes into “we can’t comment on an ongoing investigation” territory, followed by “only wing-nuts are still talking about this phony scandal — which, by the way, happened a long time ago, brah.” ABC News’ Jonathan Karl pressed Jay Carney about the Robert Petzel kabuki “resignation” yesterday, which Carney deflected by hiding behind a statement from the American Legion:...

...Submitted along with the California Cattlemen’s Association, PLF’s brief supports the petition for certiorari to the High Court by the Lunny family, owners of the 80-year-old oyster farm.

“It is outrageous that regulators are trying to destroy a family-owned business that is part of the historic fabric of Northern California and its economy, and that provides a nutritious, organic food source in an environmentally beneficial way,” said PLF Attorney Tony Francois. “Pacific Legal Foundation is proud and determined in our support of the Lunny family against this shameful assault on their livelihood, their employees, and the future of a beloved Bay Area institution.”

Drakes Bay Oyster Company sued over the permit denial — including regulators’ failure to produce a NEPA report — but a divided Ninth Circuit panel sided with the government.

“The Ninth Circuit’s ruling raises far-reaching concerns that go beyond this particular case, and cry out for Supreme Court review,” said Francois. “In essence, the Ninth Circuit has given environmental regulators a license to be arbitrary and abusive without fear that they’ll be called to account, in court, for their decisions.”

The case is Drakes Bay Oyster Company v. U.S. Department of the Interior. More information, including PLF’s amicus brief and a video, may be found at: www.pacificlegal.org.

...Judicial Watch, which did investigative work the mainstream media willfully refused to do on the Benghazi and IRS scandals, just emerged from the Obama Temple of Doom with yet another long-lost treasure of hard information: a 106-page document from the Department of Health and Human Services, revealing the breathtaking scope of the ObamaCare launch disaster. In accordance with standard Obama scandal protocols, all of this information was kept from the public until a few crucial news cycles had rolled past.... details unearthed by Judicial Watch paint a portrait of staggering incompetence and mendacity...

ObamaCare is an enduring example of Big Government incompetence and deception, mirrored precisely in the currently exploding VA scandal, which gives Americans a very accurate forecast of what our ultimate, hellish single-payer socialized future will look like. Your future under the combined domination of Big Government and Big Business will be a series of expensive frauds. Truth will be treated like a radioactive isotope that must be kept buried until its political half-life has expired. And if you grow angry when the facts are finally revealed, mainstream media “reporters” will be standing by to insult you for obsessing over old news.

Update: The expanding Serco scandal is another example of the mainstream media sleeping through bad news for ObamaCare. Serco is a contractor that was caught by local media paying a huge staff of employees at an ObamaCare “processing center” to do nothing all day. Another such office has been uncovered in Arkansas… by another Missouri news station. Apparently none of our vaunted mainstream media “reporters” could be bothered to follow upon a story of outrageous taxpayer money wasted in the name of President Boyfriend’s “signature achievement,” so Missouri reporters went to Arkansas to continue the investigation.

If you’re frustrated by the refusal of Congress to stop its fiscal insanity – and how could you not be? – it’s time to start realizing that the Constitution gives states and the people more power over Congress than most realize. And right now there is an effort called the Article V Initiative that would wield and deploy that power.

Most people don’t know, because they have never been taught, that Article V of the Constitution empowers the people through their state legislatures to propose amendments. Specifically, Article V proscribes a process in which two-thirds of state legislatures (34 total) can vote to direct Congress to call a meeting of the states for the purpose of proposing amendments.

This is not a constitutional convention, which would be for the purpose of writing an entirely new Constitution. It is solely for the purpose of voting to enact amendments. Once such a meeting of the states is called (and Congress cannot refuse if two-thirds of the states call for it), then any amendment would require a vote of three-fourths (38 total) of state legislatures for ratification....

INHOFE: What I warned America in late 2010 is proving true today: Eliminating earmarks has not saved taxpayers one dime. Instead our debt has increased by $4 trillion, and Congress is giving specified amounts of taxpayer dollars to the president so that he can spend it as he and his unelected bureaucrats so please.

Republicans’ decision to cede power to the president through the earmark moratorium has made Congress less accountable, less transparent, and less responsible to its constituents… Source: Tulsa World, May 17, 2014...

If you stop an earmark it doesn’t save one penney. All it does is take that money and gives it to the President of the United States. That’s the way the system works. It goes to the executive branch.

Speakers as distinguished as Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund Christine Lagarde, former Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have been forced to withdraw even as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the most courageous fighters of oppression on the planet, had to walk from her honorary degree from a university established in the shadow of the Holocaust. Go figure.

What next? The Bill of Rights gets repealed? An academic “War on Women”? (Three of the four attacked are female.) A new generation of undergraduate Brown Shirts comes back from 1930s Berlin to smash every college window and burn every school library book by unapproved authors in a renewed Kristallnacht?

Of course all of the above dignitaries finally walked away voluntarily from their campus honors, underlining the juvenile absurdity of these same students and faculty, not to mention the paleo-milquetost behavior of their administrations. Mercifully, William G. Bowen, the former Princeton president who replaced Lagarde as Haverford commencement speaker, called out the protestors as “immature” and “arrogant” during his speech, an understatement, to be sure, but welcome nonetheless.

This would all be great fodder for Saturday Night Live, if it still had any spine. Or a tough conservative or libertarian comedy show, if there were one. But in the final analysis, it’s not all that funny. Something is seriously wrong with our university system — as if we didn’t know. And the fault is less with the students — they are what they are and finally just young people — as with the faculties, especially in the social sciences and what’s left of the humanities....

It’s “disinvitation season.” Several high-profile commencement speakers have been “disinvited” or have withdrawn from university commencement ceremonies in response to student and faculty protests. First Ayaan Hirsa Ali was deemed too controversial for Brandeis University. Then former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice withdrew from commencement at Rutgers University after students and faculty objected due to her role promoting the Iraq War and counter-terror policies during the Bush Administration.

More recently, Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, withdrew from Smith College’s commencement in the face of protests over various IMF policies. Abby Phillip noted the irony that “one of the most accomplished and powerful women in the world” was apparently unfit to address Smith’s graduates.

The official diagnosis was a blood clot. Rove told the conference near LA Thursday, “Thirty days in the hospital? And when she reappears, she’s wearing glasses that are only for people who have traumatic brain injury? We need to know what’s up with that.”

Mrs. Clinton, when she was still serving as secretary of state, suffered a concussion after falling in December 2012. In a follow-up exam, doctors discovered a blood clot between her brain and skull. After the incident, some conservatives suggested she was exaggerating her symptoms to avoid testifying before Congress about the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans.

The hosts of The Five today took on the media double standard in covering Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin, based on Palin’s Facebook post calling out said double standard, with Greg Gutfeld surmising that unlike Clinton, Palin was fair game because to the media, she’s “not human.”

Gutfeld argued, “They treated her like an alien cartoon, because no one in the media had ever come into contact with anybody like Sarah Palin, yet they were constantly surrounded by people like Hillary Clinton, which are petulant progressives with a thirst for power.”

And it’s not just on issues of health, he and Eric Bolling also brought up the attacks on Palin’s children, which were never tolerated about Chelsea Clinton. Bolling said it was “the most disgusting thing” the media did, as opposed to the “very legitimate question” Karl Rove threw out about Clinton possibly suffering from brain damage.

Residents can still pick up applications at a several locations, including post offices, the Humboldt County Elections Office on H Street in Eureka, and Department of Motor Vehicles locations. Applications must be turned in to the elections office by May 19. They can also be mailed to the office and will be processed as long as they are postmarked by that date.

Humboldt County Assistant Registrar of Voters Kelly Sanders said around half of the 75,000 registered voters in Humboldt County — 38,000 people — vote-by-mail rather than at the polls on Election Day. The ballots started going out on May 5 to residents registered as permanent vote-by-mail voters. She said May 27 is the last day the office can mail a vote-by-mail ballot to residents who are already registered to vote. After that, voters can pick them up at the office....

Residents can register to vote online at www.registertovote.ca.gov, and request a vote-by-mail ballot and find out where their polling location is at ◼ www.co.humboldt.ca.us/election.

Individuals must re-register after moving, changing names or changing political party preference. Voters can check registration status through the Secretary of State's website at ◼ www.sos.ca.gov/elections/registration-status.

Sunday, May 18, 2014

Authorizes $600 million in general obligation bonds for affordable multifamily supportive housing to relieve homelessness, affordable transitional housing, affordable rental housing, or related facilities for veterans and their families. Fiscal Impact: Increased state bond costs averaging about $50 million annually over 15 years.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The state would sell $600 million in general obligation bonds to fund affordable multifamily housing for low-income and homeless veterans.

NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The state would not sell $600 million in general obligation bonds to fund affordable multifamily housing for low-income and homeless veterans.

ARGUMENTS:

PRO: Prop. 41, the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Act of 2014, redirects $600 million of previously approved, unspent bond funds to construct and rehabilitate housing for California’s large population of homeless veterans. This Act will construct affordable, supportive, and transitional housing for homeless and near homeless veterans without raising taxes.

CON: Proposition 41 would authorize the State to borrow (by selling bonds) $600 million out of $900 million in bonds previously approved by voters in 2008 for use by the CalVet Home and Farm Loan Program. The issue is whether such a diversion of funds is wise.

There are two measures for the upcoming primary election in June, Props 41 and 42. Both propositions were placed on the ballot by the Legislature. The CFRW Voting Body has voted to OPPOSE Prop 41 and SUPPORT Prop 42.

After extensive research and analysis, the CFRW has come out against Prop 41. Prop 41 is titled the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Bond Act. Taken at face value, this would seem like a proposition we should support. But upon further review and analysis, Prop 41 does little to fix the homeless veteran problem and actually does more harm to veterans looking to purchase homes.
Prop 41 would take $600 million away from the CalVet program, a $900 million bond program passed by voters in 2008, and instead uses that money to build multifamily, low income housing for homeless vets.

The original CalVet program helped vets secure loans for purchasing property, homes, and farms. This new prop is leaving only $300 million for those vets and instead using $600 million in bond money to support approximately 19,000 homeless vets in the state of California. California has almost 2 million vets living here, yet we are shifting 2/3rds of already approved bond money to help 1% of vets in the state. We believe that the homeless vets should be helped- with a hand up, not a hand out.

Prop 41 would build all new multifamily, low income housing, which is why labor unions are big supporters of the bill. But Prop 41 would also create a new tax liability for Californians, averaging in at least $50 million annually in new costs over the next 15 years.

Prop 41 would also create new bureaucracies for its implementation, many of these overlapping with already established state and federal programs for our homeless vets. This creates more waste and unnecessary spending when this bond money could be better spent to help our vets.

We believe that our vets deserve creative solutions. A robust economy and affordable, competitive college programs would help Californian veterans. How about tax credits for businesses that employ vets? Or reworking the CalVet program for better loan options for vets to purchase property themselves.

Requires local government compliance with laws providing for public access to local government body meetings and records of government officials. Eliminates reimbursement for costs of compliance. Fiscal Impact: Reductions in state payments to local governments in the tens of millions of dollars annually. Potential future costs on local governments in the tens of millions of dollars annually.

WHAT YOUR VOTE MEANS

YES: A YES vote on this measure means: The state would not be required to pay local governments for costs to follow state laws that give the public access to local government information.

NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The state would still be required to pay local governments for certain costs of providing public access to local government information.

ARGUMENTS

PRO: Proposition 42 will cement in the Constitution the public’s right to know what the government is doing and how it is doing it. Local agencies shouldn’t be allowed to deny a request for public information or slam a meeting door shut based on cost. Vote YES on Proposition 42.

CON: Proposition 42 would amend the California Constitution to impose the cost of complying with the California Public Records Act and local open meeting laws upon the local governments involved. An alternative, not offered by this proposition, would be to impose the cost upon the state government.

There are two measures for the upcoming primary election in June, Props 41 and 42. Both propositions were placed on the ballot by the Legislature. The CFRW Voting Body has voted to OPPOSE Prop 41 and SUPPORT Prop 42.

Prop 41 is the easy answer, not the right answer. We OPPOSE Prop 41!

By contrast, Prop 42 is a straightforward bill. The CFRW Voting Body voted to SUPPORT Prop 42. Prop 42 is called the California Compliance of Local Agencies with Public Records Act. It would require that all local agencies comply with the California Public Records Act (CPRA) and the Brown Act. A good question would be: why weren’t localities already complying with these important transparency acts? Prop 42 would guarantee a private citizen’s right to open, public records and to attend public meetings. This could save the state millions of dollars by eliminating the requirement that the state reimburse local agencies for compliance with these laws. Now the local agencies must comply with these transparency laws and will be incentivized to keep costs down since the state will no longer reimburse costs. In an increasingly paperless world, most local agencies should make their records available online to keep costs low and transparency high. We SUPPORT Prop 42!

There are two measures for the upcoming primary election in June, Props 41 and 42. Both propositions were placed on the ballot by the Legislature. The CFRW Voting Body has voted to OPPOSE Prop 41 and SUPPORT Prop 42.

After extensive research and analysis, the CFRW has come out against Prop 41. Prop 41 is titled the Veterans Housing and Homeless Prevention Bond Act. Taken at face value, this would seem like a proposition we should support. But upon further review and analysis, Prop 41 does little to fix the homeless veteran problem and actually does more harm to veterans looking to purchase homes.
Prop 41 would take $600 million away from the CalVet program, a $900 million bond program passed by voters in 2008, and instead uses that money to build multifamily, low income housing for homeless vets.

The original CalVet program helped vets secure loans for purchasing property, homes, and farms. This new prop is leaving only $300 million for those vets and instead using $600 million in bond money to support approximately 19,000 homeless vets in the state of California. California has almost 2 million vets living here, yet we are shifting 2/3rds of already approved bond money to help 1% of vets in the state. We believe that the homeless vets should be helped- with a hand up, not a hand out.

Prop 41 would build all new multifamily, low income housing, which is why labor unions are big supporters of the bill. But Prop 41 would also create a new tax liability for Californians, averaging in at least $50 million annually in new costs over the next 15 years.

Prop 41 would also create new bureaucracies for its implementation, many of these overlapping with already established state and federal programs for our homeless vets. This creates more waste and unnecessary spending when this bond money could be better spent to help our vets.

We believe that our vets deserve creative solutions. A robust economy and affordable, competitive college programs would help Californian veterans. How about tax credits for businesses that employ vets? Or reworking the CalVet program for better loan options for vets to purchase property themselves.

Prop 41 is the easy answer, not the right answer. We OPPOSE Prop 41!

By contrast, Prop 42 is a straightforward bill. The CFRW Voting Body voted to SUPPORT Prop 42. Prop 42 is called the California Compliance of Local Agencies with Public Records Act. It would require that all local agencies comply with the California Public Records Act (CPRA) and the Brown Act. A good question would be: why weren’t localities already complying with these important transparency acts? Prop 42 would guarantee a private citizen’s right to open, public records and to attend public meetings. This could save the state millions of dollars by eliminating the requirement that the state reimburse local agencies for compliance with these laws. Now the local agencies must comply with these transparency laws and will be incentivized to keep costs down since the state will no longer reimburse costs. In an increasingly paperless world, most local agencies should make their records available online to keep costs low and transparency high. We SUPPORT Prop 42!

...Marco Rubio sent out a statement this morning demanding everything the VA currently has on its wait-list scandal:

“I am troubled by new reports suggesting secret waiting lists were being kept at the Gainesville VA hospital, potentially to the detriment of our veterans’ health. This would be outrageous in its own right, but it’s even more so because of the pervasive problems emerging about the VA each day in all corners of the country.

“Earlier this week, I asked VA Secretary Shinseki for all information regarding secret VA waiting lists in Florida and Biloxi, MS. I don’t want to wait until everything is ready. I want to see what is available now, starting with Gainesville.

“It also highlights the need to bring real accountability to the VA. From problems in Phoenix to Miami and now potentially Gainesville too, we’ve seen plenty of finger-pointing and excuses, but no one actually being fired for incompetence and negligence in the performance of their duties. As an easy first step, Congress should approve the VA reform bill Congressman Jeff Miller and I have introduced.”

For months con men have been preying on grandparents by telephone, apparently finding them a Mother Lode of money. Just last seek I learned how a Long Island, New York couple lost $4,500 to these smooth talkers who presented a plausible scenario.

It went this way: Their grandson, a college student, called from Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic (it sounded just like him). He had gone there during spring break. Alas, the car he was in from the airport to his hotel was stopped for a traffic violation. When the officer saw young men in the car, he ordered them out and searched the car. In the trunk he found a bag of cocaine hidden under the floor mat. It was off to jail for all.

The “grandson” told his “grandparents” that he had been allowed one call, so he called them, presumably because he was sure they would be home. He turned the call over to a U.S. Embassy official who had come to the jail to help them. He introduced himself and advised there would be a hearing and that their grandson would be found innocent; however, the court calendar was crowded and a quick payment of bail might get him a hearing the next day, but no payment could result in a delay of weeks. At that point the grandparents wired the requested $4,500 for the bail. It was sent to a supposed bail bondsman in Santo Domingo. The grandparents were told the bail would be refunded a few days after the hearing.

The next day the “Embassy official” called with the good news that the grandson had been found innocent; however, the court had imposed a fine on him. The grandparents, now suspicious, said they would have to call back. They then learned that their real grandson had spent the weekend at his family home in New Jersey.

Despite their loss, the victims had seen spared a much larger one. Had they wired the “fine” it would have been followed a day later with the news from the “Embassy official” that a good-sized bribe would have to be paid to the Customs officials to get back the grandson’s passport. After that, his air ticket home would have to be changed in order to get him on the next plane to New York. This would cost several hundred dollars.

The scenario sounded familiar to me, as I had received a call from my “grandson” in January, telling me of a similar fate on the way from the Dominican Republic airport to the hotel in Santo Domingo. Then, two months later he called again.

This time I feigned deafness and said, “Who did you say was calling?” “Your grandson. Sorry about my voice. I have a cold.” “Where are you?” I asked. “Actually, I’m traveling. I’m in Peru.” Whereupon, after a pause, I said, “You are not my grandson and you are not in Peru. I am familiar with this scam.” and slammed down the telephone.

In retrospect, a better course of action would have been to string them along until I could get a telephone number, and then call the State Department’s American Citizen Service at 1/888/407-4747. They are on duty 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

This band of crooks is particularly difficult, because it moves around. A State Department investigator told me that they are using this dodge all over the world, masquerading as officials of the U.S. Embassy in the particular country.

While the arrested travelers are most often grandsons, sometimes they are granddaughters (involving, for example, a dented fender in a rental car, in a country where a foreign driver is considered responsible, no matter who was at fault).

If you are a grandparent or know anyone who is, beware of this seductive approach. Even if the “grandchild” sounds close to the real one, be immediately suspicious. If you play along until the “Embassy official” gives you the pitch about money, firmly say you will need some time (such as half an hour) and ask for his telephone number. The number may be phony; nevertheless, report it immediately to American Citizen Services.

A recent communiqué advised that the con men have lately concentrated on Arizona and Florida where there are a great many grandparents. If you don’t live in either, still be on guard. They apparently make the connection between the grandparent and the grandchild by some sophisticated online data mining, so they make strike wherever you live.

__________________

Peter Hannaford was closely associated with the late President Reagan for a number of years. His latest book is ◼ “Presidential Retreats.”

...Figuring out how we can lift the economy out of its now six-year-long rut should be the paramount goal of those concerned with rising inequality.

The debate over inequality isn’t going away anytime soon, since liberals have taken Obama’s lead and chosen it as their policy battleground leading up to 2016.

When going up against a familiar opponent, it’s always comforting to know which play they’re going to call. When it comes to inequality, liberals will call the same play in 2016 they called for in 1916.

Conservatives know what’s coming. They should have a superior defense ready for deployment.

From President Obama to Paul Krugman, Thomas Piketty to Elizabeth Warren, the Left has adopted “inequality” as the cause of the day. They paint a picture of a new Gilded Age in which a hereditary American gentry becomes ever richer, while the vast majority of Americans toil away in near-Dickensian poverty. It’s a compelling political narrative, one that can be used to advance any number of policy proposals, from higher taxes to increases in the minimum wage.

Unfortunately, bad facts make for bad policy. Let’s look at just some of the ways they get it wrong....

There is good reason for this country to have a debate over issues such as how best to reduce poverty and increase middle-class incomes. But beating the inequality drum will do little to contribute to that debate.

The Nigeria Security Tracker follows deaths that can be attributable to a terror group or tensions between ethnic, political, or religious groups. While the tracker does follow all varieties of this sort of violence, its findings suggest that Boko Haram is far and away the most dangerous group conducting these deadly activities. The group, which has existed in its current state under leader Abubakar Shekau since 2009, is to blame for a great number of these deaths.

When announcing the tracker in 2012, the Council on Foreign Relations noted that Boko Haram was also responsible indirectly for a number of deaths thanks to inefficient attempts by the Nigerian government to fight them. "Government soldiers have been indiscriminate in their fight against Boko Haram, often killing innocent civilians," noted Campbell. "Police across the country are notorious for extrajudicial murder. Violent clashes between ethnic or occupational groups at times appear indicative of a deeper conflict between Christians and Muslims."

At the time, the U.S. Department of State under Hillary Clinton refused to add Boko Haram to a list of terror organizations, despite the number of attacks already attributable to the radical Islamist group....

The tracker has found that Boko Haram is responsible for ◼ more than 4,000 deaths in 2014.... Boko Haram opposes the education of girls and has kidnapped girls to use as cooks and sex slaves. It has killed hundreds of children.

The group seeks to replace Nigeria's government with a ultra-strict Islamic state.

...Palin blasted the Obama administration's "embarrassing" reliance on junior high-like tweets and tickles in place of a foreign policy rooted in peace through strength."

"Diplomacy via Twitter is the lazy, ineffectual, naïve, and insulting way for America’s leaders to deal with major national and international issues," she said. "If you’re going to get involved anyway, Mr. President, learn to understand this and believe it, then announce it: Victory is only brought to you 'courtesy of the red, white and blue.' It’s certainly not won by your mere 'unfriending' the bad guys on Facebook. Leading from behind is not the American way."

She added that the kidnapped Nigerian girls are now in a "life and death" situation in the hands of terrorists and asked, "And what is the Obama administration’s weapon of choice in this battle for these young girls’ lives? Hashtagging tweets on social media!"

Palin then said, "like the patriot writes in this photo, winning takes Warriors":

If you intend to rescue these innocent girls whose only “crime” was seeking an education despite the threats of insane Islamic terrorists who drag women back to the Stone Age (see, Liberals, THAT is the real “war on women” so quit making it up that conservatives wage it), then you need to send a message to the world that our United States military is the strongest force to protect the good guys, and the most deadly against the bad guys. Pretty simple, the world needs to know America is still on the side of the good guys.

This fantastic gif tells the story of how America came to be. Since the Constitution took effect on March 4, 1789 until the U.S. added the 50th state of Hawaii in 1959, a quick look at this gif shows us how a nation was formed.

Welcome

I would like to introduce myself. I am John Schutt the new chairman of the Humboldt County Republican Central Committee. I'd like to ask each one of you to send me your thoughts and ideas on making Humboldt great again. I also am asking for your help, need republicans for open spots on the central committee, committee seats, letters to the editor writers, and many other opportunities. The 2018 election for governor and other seats is just around the corner and we will need all your help. Please feel free to call the office (442-2259) or leave a message here (or on Facebook) and I will get back to you as soon as possible.